Weve been waiting for this admission a long time, and watching the media reaction is interesting to say the least. Bojanowski writes that The word has been out for quite some time now that the climate is developing differently than predicted earlier. He poses the question: How many more years of stagnation are needed before scientists rethink their predictions of future warming?

Bojanowski adds (emphasis added):

15 years without warming are now behind us. The stagnation of global near-surface average temperatures shows that the uncertainties in the climate prognoses are surprisingly large. The public is now waiting with suspense to see if the next UN IPCC report, due in September, is going to discuss the warming stop.

The big question now circulating through the stunned European media, governments and activist organisations is how could the warming stop have happened? Moreover, how do we now explain it to the public? To find an answer, Bojanowski contacted a number of sources. The result, in summary: scientists are now left only to speculate over an entire range of possible causes. Uncertainty in climate science indeed has never been greater. Its back to square one.

One explanation Spiegel presents is that the oceans have somehow absorbed the heat and are now hiding it somewhere. Yet, Bojanowski writes that there is very little available data to base this on: There is a lot of uncertainty concerning the development of the water temperature. It has long appeared that also the oceans have not warmed further since 2003. Spiegel then quotes Kevin Trenberth concerning NASAs claim that theyve detected a warming of the oceans: The uncertainties with the data are too great. We need to improve our measurements.

Spiegel also writes that the missing heat may be lurking somewhere deep in the oceans. But here Bojanowski [Spiegel] quotes Doug Smith of the Met Office: This is very difficult to confirm. Jochem Marotzke of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPI) suspects that energy has been conveyed to the oceans interior, but theres a dire lack of data to confirm this. Bojanowski writes over the current state of ocean data measurement: Without intensifying the data measurement network, we are going to have to wait a long time for any proof.

Scientists also suspect that the stratosphere may have something to do with the recent global temperature stall. Susan Solomon says the stratosphere has gotten considerably drier, and so warming at the surface may have been reduced by a quarter. But Bojanowski reminds us that under the bottom line, the scientists are pretty much without a clue; he writes:

Well then, maybe its due to aerosols from China and India blocking out the sun, some scientists are speculating, and thus weakening warming by one third. Spiegel writes that If the air were cleaner, then climate warming would accelerate. But aerosols have always been used a convenient joker in climate models to explain unexpected cooling, such as from 1945 to 1980.

In fact, all the explanations presented by Bojanowski above have already been thoroughly looked at in a book- one year ago  by a pair of scientists: Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt and Dr. Sebastian Lüning. Last year much of the media massively ostracised them for floating crude theories. A year later its indeed strange to see that their crude theories are now completely in vogue.

How does Bojanowski sum it up? The numerous possible explanations do show just how imprecisely climate is understood.

Trenberth is left with only anecdotes, isolated singular events

Yet, as Bojanowski points out, some scientists refuse to give up on the AGW theory. He writes:

Under the bottom line, there are a number of various ominous signs of warming: rising sea levels, Arctic sea ice reduced by a half in the summertime, melting glaciers. At some locations there are signs that extreme weather events are increasing. There are many signs of global warming, emphasizes Kevon Trenberth, near surface air temperatures is only one of them.

Sorry, but isolated singular events do not constitute trends, let alone science. Prof. Trenberth really ought to know that. This is pathetic. The observed data and measured trends have stopped showing global warming. So are scientists now claiming that singular events are robust signs? This would be only one step away from astrology!

Bojanowski reminds us again that the science is poorly understood and that a number of factors are at play. He writes:

Indeed new surprising data keep popping up. Recently a new study appeared showing that soot particles from unfiltered diesel engine exhaust and open fires have had an impact on warming that is twice as high as what was first thought.

Bojanowski also tells his readers that Computer simulations have shown that warming has made tropical storms more seldom.

He also mentions other factors that are poorly understood, such as: solar radiations impact on clouds, water vapour cycles, and natural and man-made aerosols.

Short term prognoses remain especially uncertain. But longterm ones are sure?

Spiegel at the end of the article seems to be duped into thinking that short-term prognoses are uncertain, but longterm ones are rather sure. Spiegel quotes warmist Jochem Marotzke of the MPI:

Climate prognoses over time periods of a few years still remain especially uncertain. Our forecasting system in this regard still lets us down, says MPI director Marotzke. But were still working on it.

This to me appears to be an attempt to have readers believe that although theyve botched the short-term projections completely, they are likely still right about the longterm projections of warming. Now take five minutes to get your laughing under control. If the models failed for the first 15 years, then they are no good! Period! Theyre crap, and you cannot rely on them for projecting the long-term. They belong in one place only: the dustbin! How long must we wait before climate scientists return to science?

Dont get me wrong, at least this article, admitting something is terribly amiss, is a very encouraging step in the right direction. But its difficult to remain hopeful when climate scientists continue demonstrating that they do not even know what proper scientific methodology is.

Lastly, I like they way Bojanowski ends his piece:

Current prognoses warn of a 5°C warming if CO2 emissions continue as before. But it is not now well-known just how much natural climate impacts are able to change the temperature development  the new NASA data have revealed this as well.

Spiegel science writers would be well-advised to read Fritz Vahrenholts and Sebastian Lünings Die kalte Sonne. Practically every question brought up by Bojanowski has been answered there  one year ago. Moreover, Lünings and Vahrenholts temperature model for the next 100 years so far has been dead on.

What it all means....is that any Joe on the street had the basic knowledge to add up the numbers and conclude real data better than climate scientists. If true...they might as well go out and get jobs at Pizza Hut and Jiffy Lube.

Did anyone see the small montage of Al Gore that showed him trying to convince David Letterman and Matt Lauer that selling his television station to Al Jazzera (sponsored by Big Foreign Oil) was not a sellout, that they were more concerned about global warming than any other entity interested in buying?

I am not saying I want him to choke on a sandwich or anything like that, but it would be good publicity for the sandwich.

To call him disgustingly, morbidly obese is like calling the sun a little warm.

Like they were gonna just confess about all the FRAUD they have perpetrated, this is their way out of the Global Warming Attempted Fraud. It’s not like anyone will prosecute them, and I am sure Al Gore is on suicide watch after reading this.

The article has many claims of “dire lack of data”, which has to be a clue as there’s never been anything but a dire lack of data as in proof of any of it from the git-go IMO.

My gosh they tried to railroad us with the rainforest back in the sixties, and then they tried to railroad us with AGW.

No Proof. Lots of discussion to give a sense of legitimacy, but no proof. Billions, perhaps Trillions of dollars blown on bullshit. People scared, afraid to bring children into the World because of bullshit. Lives turned upside down, because of bullshit.

There are some criminals that need to be exposed IMO, and justice needs to prevail, but as I said, no proof. They’ll walk, and in very expensive shoes they well can afford having ripped off the World with their bullshit.

It isn’t over, but this rant is.

11
posted on 01/30/2013 8:05:53 PM PST
by rockinqsranch
(Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)

Real scientists would not be baffled. When a theory cannot be supported by experiments and observations the conclusion is the theory was flawed and it is rejected. That is the true scientific method. Man caused global warming however is a dogma not a scientific theory and despite all the evidence to the contrary global warming cultists will cling to this dogma calling those who do not agree heretics or deniers. This is exactly the situation experienced by Galileo. The Church and its Inquisition supported a dogma of an unmoving earth at the center of the universe with the sun, moon, planets and stars orbiting around the earth. When Galileo demonstrated by observations with his telescope that the sun not the earth is the center of our universe with the earth and planets revolving about it. Galileo was hauled before the Inquisition and forced to recant his theory even though by scientific method it was correct.

[snip] was introduced by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) on Jan. 22, 2013... the sole sponsor of the bill... The resolution... Demands that the advancement of science be protected from those unconcerned with the adverse impacts of global warming and climate change ...Roy Speckhardt, Executive Director of the American Humanist Association, sent out a letter in support of the resolution. [/snip]

14
posted on 01/30/2013 8:12:56 PM PST
by SunkenCiv
(Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)

There are some criminals that need to be exposed IMO, and justice needs to prevail, but as I said, no proof. Theyll walk, and in very expensive shoes they well can afford having ripped off the World with their bullshit.

You may not have noticed, but Algore seems to have been "eatin' high on the hog" lately...

“The public is now waiting with suspense to see if the next UN IPCC report, due in September, is going to discuss the warming stop.

I REALLY doubt that the Sheeple will be waiting. EVERYTHING they have been told, and believe, points to imminent global warming catastrophe that must end RIGHT NOW.

And Obama needs things like this to carry out his agenda. Just like every other “crisis” that he has milked. The crisis of people dieing on the streets because of no health insurance. The crisis of all of our kids being shot with “assault weapons”. Just like those two false crisis, the global warming “crisis” will also be used.

“Some folks say there is no warming - even scientists. But things are so complicated it is hard to predict. But, we KNOW that we MUST reduce our emissions before it is too late because we KNOW in our hearts that it is bad.”

26
posted on 01/30/2013 8:54:58 PM PST
by 21twelve
("We've got the guns, and we got the numbers" adapted and revised from Jim M.)

Naw, he’s still trying to make amends to his Communist father looking in on him from Hell telling him he failed in his given fatherly mission to become President. Al is just doing all of this to say “see dad, I really did amount to something, sort of.” ( And I made a $hitpot full of money doing it)

Short term prognoses remain especially uncertain. But longterm ones are sure?

Actually, this scenario is extremely common in science. Note the laws of probability, for an obvious one. I cannot know whether heads will turn up with the next flip, but I can state with a great deal of certainty how many times it will turn up in the next one million flips.

Well... It was 71 deg. (F) with severe t-storms, local flooding, and small tornados here yesterday; tomorrow morning the forecast is for 15 deg. F and maybe a little snow. This is not a record, but it does help keep one on their toes:

Kirk: The planet is destroying itself!

Klingon: Yes, exhilarating, isn't it?!!!

One wonders what some of these weenies would do if the period of glaciation that is just about due (if past cycles stay consistent) were to occur.

35
posted on 01/31/2013 1:06:37 AM PST
by Paul R.
(We are in a break in an Ice Age. A brief break at that...)

It is not stopping California from implementing massive land and water use changes (CA Water Plan) justified by
“climate change.” Heck, they are even restructuring government aligning it into a top down regional model with harmonization of General Planning.

If there was no man around the warming from the ending of the Little Ice Age would have added about 5-10 ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere (basically by warming the oceans about 1C). Instead we have seen more than 100 ppm rise. The ocean now absorbs net CO2, doesn't release it (net). The only scientific question is whether the land sinks will grow (probably) and those and the ocean will continue to damp the human-made CO2 rise.

Recently the global atmospheric temperature was about 1C warmer than a year ago (there was a trough a year ago and it's been high recently). What causes that kind of rapid global warming? Same thing that will cause the coming cooling: natural processes (mostly weather modulated by solar effects). The earth stays within a comfortable range because as the natural processes try to unbalance it, radiative and convective cooling balances it.

After having spent an entire life time, following, not just world history, ancient history, fairly recent current history, such as the Decline of the Anasazi Culture back in ? ought 1200-1400 A.D. or is it the newer politically correct time stamp?

There have always been cycles of droughts and wet spells, changing climates, long before we had factories, pollution breathing coal fired plants, etc.

Just read some of the translated treastises from Ancient Egypt, Babylonia, Mayan, and other assorted cultures through time.

Let us get real!!!

A rise, centuries and eons ago, of CO2 emissions, occurred, AFTER a GLOBAL WARMING.

NOT BEFORE!!!

AND NOT THE CAUSE!!!

Possibly brought on by a meterorite that detonated on the surface of our planet, or perhaps, the widespread fires created by another major meterorite, or perhaps, Nobody really knows!!!

KEYWORD: NOBODY REALLY KNOWS!!!

Live in an area where there are folks coming through complaining about health problems related to cowsies’ flatulance.

Perfectly serious about their facts.

The rise in CO2, Methane Gas, etc.

For thousands of centuries, since the cow was domesticated, children, and other folks have lived off their bounty.

My simple REALITY CHECK!!! Back in the 50’s in a basic elementary school science lesson, taught the basics of Human Breathing.

We breathe in Oxygen, it circulates through the lungs, goes through a complicated exhange of whatever, and is expelled as, ooops!!!! CO2.

The CO2 is then absorbed by plants, who utilize it in their photosynthesis, to not only produce chlorophill? (Green up the plant, provide valuable nutrients, especially for human and animal consuption)but produce oxygen as a byproduct.

NOT CO2!!! or METHANE!!!

The Eco movement began back in the 60’s and promoted an UNBALANCED VIEW OF NATURE.

Whatever happened to the balanced Native American View of Nature?

Whatever happened to Informed Facts, Substantiated, Facts???

As in Factual???

Disappeared, somewhere along the rise of technology for Techno Zombies, Unrestrained Cell Phone Usage, and the latest Craze of Text Messaging.

Goodbye Critical Thinking Skills, Rationality, Responsibility.

However, just to live up to my moniker of Polly Anna, will provide you with some options for balance through humor.

If you want a HUMOROUS TAKE ON GLOBAL WARMING, just visit the MINNASOTANS FOR GLOBAL WARMING (on U-Tube).

Additional links on their site will lead you to more scientific thoughts from Lord Mockington, a British Scientist who is doing what he can to Debunk the Global Warming Model.

And other concerned parties who whole heartedly believe in Promoting and Encouraging Critical Thinking Skills, not to mention, COMMON SENSE!!!

"any Joe on the street had the basic knowledge to add up the numbers and conclude real data better than climate scientists. If true...they might as well go out and get jobs at Pizza Hut and Jiffy Lube."

Working at Pizza Hut and Jiffy Lube requires a basic knowledge of science and analysis. The global warming advocates have not demonstrated this ability.

44
posted on 01/31/2013 5:01:12 AM PST
by norwaypinesavage
(Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)

Polly: WELCOME TO FR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Develop a thick skin quickly, as some of us are still trying to get a passing grade in Manners 101, follow Jim Robinson’s Rules, and donate when you can.

_________________

Great thoughtful comments Polly, thanks! Few of us recognize cycles in our 3 score and 10, but as you pointed out, History is replete with cycles.

IMHO, we live in an age of zero accountability. GW is an excellent example as follows:

1.) The popular speculation is that there is a Cause-and-Effect relationship between the concentration of CO2 and the temperature in the atmosphere.

2.) In the discipline of SCIENCE, all ideas are objectively tested REPEATEDLY! To the best of my knowledge, there have been NO published Scientific tests of ANY Cause-and Effect relationship between Temp and CO2.

4.) A cross-plot of Temp and CO2 concentration with time does show a rough correlation between the two, but with significant cyclical deviations, such as in the mid-1940’s.

5.) Scientific Cause-and-Effect testing of ideas has been replaced by statistical INFERENCE “testing” in the published high-quality Scientific Literature.

6.) The GW Speculation currently has over 200 dependent and independent variables, and thus is securely impervious to Scientific Testing.

7.) We are thus in the age of NO Accountability, in junk science, or in National Politics. Well, unless one is from the “show me” State of Missouri !

BTW, for Scientists and Politicians, the most difficult thing for them to say is the following: “I don’t know.” As a result ideas are held onto for long periods of time, even though there is no proof known to support those ideas.

Be the first on your block to holler “PROVE IT!”

However, be prepared for all sorts of cheap, verbal abuse, as junk scientists, and junk politicians hate to be held accountable for their actions and inactions.

Just b/c it appears the Sun is the center of our solar system 2 things still remain:

a. Michelson-Morley experiments could find no solar wind and no one has repeated these experiments afaik. But even Einstein said both sun-centered and Earth-centered solar systems are supported by the math. Earth centered just makes he math much more complicated - heck I get dizzy just thinking about it - pun intended.

b. We could very well be the center of the universe! In fact it make the big bang and Einstein’s gravitational time dilation and relativity much more palatable for true believers.

Lastly though it could just be that we, mankind, are the central primary focus and attention of God. Afterall, He did say [and show somewhat] that we are created in His image.

Not too mention if they truly understood Earth’s climate change then they’d be much better at forecasting accurate weather for more than 1-2 days/weeks. Instead it appears they are just more likely to predict the more extreme models to pacify the masses when they get the good news that the local expert was wrong in our favor...

"One wonders what some of these weenies would do if the period of glaciation that is just about due (if past cycles stay consistent) were to occur."

THAT we can fix. Just add some SF6 (sulfur hexafluoride) to the stratosphere. Very stable molecule.....HUGE greenhouse enhancer (I think it either one of, or THE strongest greenhouse gas known...23,000 x that of CO2).

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.